Doc's Talk: The Hate Process

Friday, November 12, 2010

The Hate Process

How can there ever be peace between Israel and the Palestinians when the "moderate" Fatah glorifies the terrorist who plotted the 1972 massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympic Games?

by P. David Hornik

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is reported to have told Vice-President Joe Biden this week that “Israel has made enough efforts to reach a peace settlement [with the Palestinians] and has not received sufficient gestures in return.” If so, it was a great understatement. Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) has published an overview of anti-Israeli incitement in the Palestinian Authority during July and August of this year. That was the time of the Israeli-Palestinian proximity talks, the result of intensive U.S. diplomacy spearheaded by Middle East envoy George Mitchell.

Those proximity talks led to the crowning glory: the direct talks of September, which Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas ended almost as soon as they had begun by demanding that Netanyahu extend Israel’s settlement freeze — something Abbas knew he wouldn’t do.

With the talks now in suspension and a change having swept Washington, speculation is rife as to whether, and how much, the administration will keep pushing for the “process” to continue.

No one who reads PMW’s report, however, can rationally believe that the PA is ripe for peace or that U.S. efforts to promote this entity to statehood are efforts well spent.

Since June of last year Netanyahu has been airing the demand that the Palestinian side recognize Israel as a Jewish state. But as far as the official PA is concerned, Israel’s nature is not in question: it doesn’t exist at all.

As PMW notes, on June 4, 2008, then-candidate Obama told the AIPAC conference: “I will never compromise when it comes to Israel’s security. … Not when there are maps across the Middle East that don’t even acknowledge Israel’s existence.”

And yet, as PMW points out — displaying many examples — “all the official PA maps in offices, websites, schoolbooks, and those appearing on official PA TV since the start of the proximity talks continue the policy of defining all of Israel as ‘Palestine.’”

That policy is also expressed verbally by referring to Israel in official PA TV shows, its official newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, and so on solely with such epithets as “the occupied homeland,” the “Palestinian interior,” and the like. And this refers to Israel within the 1967 borders, the part that’s supposed to be one of the “two states living side by side in peace and security.”

This goes hand in hand with a systematic, total denial of Jewish ties to Jerusalem and the land of Israel, laced by constant incendiary claims that Israel plans to seize and even destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

Blatant demonization of Israelis and Jews is also an ongoing feature of PA media and sermons, to the point that the supposed distinction between “radical” Hamas, the rulers of Gaza, and the supposedly “moderate” Fatah, the rulers of the PA, emerges as meaningless.

Statements from Al-Hayat Al-Jadida include “[The Israelis] are the new Nazis upon the earth” and “Palestine has been torn in the hands of the Zionists, and the Jews have crucified it and caused blood to flow from its body.” The paper also makes allegations that Israel is “spreading drugs among the [Palestinian] young people.”

In July, after Israel had expelled four Hamas officials from Jerusalem, it was claimed this was a “prelude to the forced expulsion of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, whose aim is to change the geographical and demographic situation in the holy city.” The speaker of those words, quoted in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, was Abbas.

Anyone for peace?

And among several examples in the report of Der Stürmer-type graphics, here, for example, from PA TV on July 1 this year, is a Jew eating the Al-Aqsa Mosque’s adjacent shrine in Jerusalem, the Dome of the Rock:

And here, from PA TV on July 4, are Jewish snakes making sure no one can climb up ladders of peace:

And how do you become an exalted figure in the PA? By being a terrorist — best of all, a dead one — who murdered as many Israelis as possible.

For instance, on July 3, Mohammad Daoud Oudeh (Abu Daoud), engineer of the Munich massacre of Israeli Olympic athletes in 1972, breathed his last. Fatah, Abbas’s ruling party, reacted by opening an official mourners’ tent and declaring: “He will always remain our ideal and a role model for the generations to come.” Al-Hayat Al-Jadida proclaimed that “his name shone brightly in … Munich in 1972.”

And Abbas himself went so far as to telephone Abu Daoud’s family and “noted [his] life filled with struggle, his devoted effort.”

But accolades aren’t all. PMW also lists eight cases in July and August alone of PA summer camps and sports tournaments being named after terrorists. In two cases the terrorist was Dalal Mughrabi. She led the 1978 Coastal Road Massacre — the worst terror attack in Israel’s history, taking 37 lives including 12 children.

On April 8 of this year, State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said, “We also strongly condemn the [PA’s] glorification of terrorists. Honoring terrorists … by official statements or by the dedication of public places … must end.”

Clearly, the PA didn’t listen to him. Yet the diplomatic activity rolled on and still does today, with most of the heat directed at Israel for building homes in the West Bank.

Now that so many pro-Israel Republicans have been voted in, is there light at the end of the tunnel? No one knows what will happen in 2012, but one can only hope so.

Roughly, since George Shultz, President Reagan’s secretary of state, opened contacts with Yasser Arafat’s PLO in 1987, getting a state for the Palestinians (in addition to the one they already have, Jordan) has been a bipartisan obsession of U.S. administrations. Presidents Bush Sr., Clinton, Bush Jr., and Obama have all had the bug — the last with, arguably, the most severe case of it.

This has meshed with Israeli wishful thinking to produce an empowerment of the Palestinians and consequent unprecedented suicide attacks, rocket attacks, and other terrorism in Israel.

The Fatah-led PA and Hamas-led Gaza now exist and are realities Israel has to deal with. Given that these two Palestinian entities compete with each other in anti-Israeli hatred, the reason the PA is currently less of a problem is that Israel retains military control over it.

Pushing for one, or both — a point no one seems to clarify — of these hate-filled entities to attain sovereign statehood within a year or so, untrammeled by any Israeli military presence, flies in the face of logic and of Israeli and American interests.

P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Beersheva. He blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk